Many video games have succeeded in giving sophisticated deep narratives. Epic debate.

[InconceivableTruth]

I know there are more meaningful films out there, but compare the age. Games are progressing rapidly, and there are many games out there that one could claim to have sophisticated narratives. Now, in general, that's a whole different story. I always look at the good and derive my views from them.

That's precisely the point I've been trying to make. The medium needs to progress further to be a viable avenue of study, in my opinion.

There are about ~25-30 games, perhaps more, with deep narratives. That's enough for a class. There are sequential art classes, so soon there may be for one for games.

Speaking of games and interactivity, my friend that's attending a prestigious game design school recently wrote an article about Alan Wake and Zizek's concept of the "real real":

http://www.cosmicmaher.com/?p=267

As you can tell, many games have reached "literary" status. They have powerful narratives, and it is arrogant to ignore the potential.

They have made it there, but to claim whether they have made it there in general is a whole other story. I see an increase and awareness of the potential within this medium and, subsequently, more games with powerful narratives.

 

[Rakkana]

We have game design at our college... i think its the closest we'll ever get.

 

[Pegghead]

Frankly there's nothing more pretentious I find than somebody going on about how Ico is strictly on par with citizen Kane and the day videogames are brought into classrooms for analysis rather than design is probably the day I stop going to school and start assisting the small legions of guerilla gamers, the pnly remnants of the bygone days when games were played for fun and were almost free of the poor mans over-analyzers.

First off, why are you comparing two pieces of art that have different aims? I was using ICO as an example of how sublime some symbolism may be, but I wasn't using it as a way to undermine film as a medium. Refer to my last post.

I'm saying, in general, games are capable of having the same thematic depth as film. A long time ago, people considered sequential art to be trash, but now look at Alan Moore's fame. Watchmen is incredible.

The keyword there is capable. I'm sure a comic strip in the funny pages could be capable of exploring the deep motivations behind why Dagwood doesn't enjoy his work and the deep psychological scars his boss has brought on but why couldn't the author have done that in a book? As such why do people appreciate videogames, a medium that outlines what it stands for in its fucking title, that force the player to read pages upon pages of dialogue, watch hours of cutscenes or listen to soppy characters mope on about tedious plot points that make the game universe seem less exciting and expanded and more incredibly boring as the suave space ranger Shepard discusses the aggravations between wierd aliens number one and wierd aliens number two that work on the intergalactic doolally council.

I appreciate games that can manage to pull off fresh universes, relatable characters and engaging plots but if I'm not having fun then it's all for nought. The best games weave all that "Thematic depth" in with their gameplay, Bioshock may be a first person shooter but you can pick up snatches of the city's history and residents backstories as you play, not to mention the fact that the good usage of a city gone mad with genetic modification and striving for perfection boosted gameplay (Use of plasmids, gathering of adam to improve player stats, the final boss fight who to me looked inspired by artworks of the '30s that would portray similar looking strong, barechested men supporting cities and skyrails and trains and people). On the other hand games that have nothing good to offer in the gameplay department (Fun gameplay, clever mechanics, well done controls, variation in the settings and enemies) but instead focus solely on creating every minor detail of a complex and unengaging universe and recording thousands of hours of dialogue for the player to sit through like the worlds most misguided radio play (I.e Mass Effect) fall short as games and probably would've worked better as books because to me sitting down to play a game and sitting down to read a book entails different levels of concentration, energy and expectation.

And if we begin forcing down only the thematic elements of gaming in the school system nonetheless with no appreciation for the game part of a videogame then there goes everything afforementioned that makes our hobby unique from books or films.

 

[InconceivableTruth]

The keyword there is capable.

It's obvious you didn't read my posts or put any thought into them. There are games that have already reached the status of powerful narratives! How could I make it any clearer. The key phrase is these games show what the medium is capable of, for they have already succeeded themselves.

I'm sure a comic strip in the funny pages could be capable of exploring the deep motivations behind why Dagwood doesn't enjoy his work and the deep psychological scars his boss has brought on but why couldn't the author have done that in a book? As such why do people appreciate videogames, a medium that outlines what it stands for in its fucking title, that force the player to read pages upon pages of dialogue, watch hours of cutscenes or listen to soppy characters mope on about tedious plot points that make the game universe seem less exciting and expanded and more incredibly boring as the suave space ranger Shepard discusses the aggravations between wierd aliens number one and wierd aliens number two that work on the intergalactic doolally council.

Have you ever played Deus Ex and observed its sociological criticisms? Persona 2 with its OBVIOUS Jungian allusions (shadow, persona)? Alan Wake with its interesting exploration on the nature of horror itself? Anything that is not cliched? You're generalized an entire medium based off a pretense!

I appreciate games that can manage to pull off fresh universes, relatable characters and engaging plots but if I'm not having fun then it's all for nought.

The same could be said for much of literature. If the prose is horrendous, why read it? Why not pick up ethics or a science book? Of course there are other elements needed for a good experience. Stop taking things out of context.

On the other hand games that have nothing good to offer in the gameplay department (Fun gameplay, clever mechanics, well done controls, variation in the settings and enemies) but instead focus solely on creating every minor detail of a complex and unengaging universe and recording thousands of hours of dialogue for the player to sit through like the worlds most misguided radio play (I.e Mass Effect) fall short as games and probably would've worked better as books because to me sitting down to play a game and sitting down to read a book entails different levels of concentration, energy and expectation.

You are correct. A deep narrative by itself doesn't make a good game. We need to analyze a piece of art first by determining what is its goal. I don't give Halo low scores because of its uninspired story precisely because that's not its original intent. On the other hand, I give Heavy Rain low marks because of all its plot-holes and rushed story. It's obvious were aiming for an immersive, deep narrative, but I believe they failed. This is one particular example. As for bad gameplay getting in the way of good narrative, this happens too. A good example of a game with great narrative but poor gameplay is Eternal Darkness. A good correlation is bad prose and a good story (fiction) or bad pacing and a good narrative (film), but the point is, the experience of art is multi-faceted. Everything has to be taken into account, but the MAIN intent should be held as the highest regard.

And if we begin forcing down only the thematic elements of gaming in the school system nonetheless with no appreciation for the game part of a videogame then there goes everything afforementioned that makes our hobby unique from books or films.[/quote]

A long time ago graphic novels were labeled as children's play. Now people read Maus and write literary analyses for it in advanced literature classes. Why not do the same thing with Deus Ex, Persona 2, Nocturne, Planescape, Fatale, or any of the other games I mentioned? Look at my friend's essay of Fatale.

 

[Cody211282]

But I'm telling you there are many games that are on par with some literature. Your post was full of contradictions such as, "I'm aware they can be a medium on par with literature and film but they are not," and "I'm aware that some day games break this barrier and that even today some games are breaking some of these barriers." Either they are or they are not capable of powerful narratives, and I gave actual specific examples of games that accomplish this feat. Ludology is a huge field, and the consensus is a good narrative may have as much depth as a good book. Of course, they're both better at accomplish certain aims, but the essay of Earthbound, and the other games I referenced, indicate they are capable of thematic depth.

You need to play less mainstream games if you're seeking sophisticated narratives. I can name at least 20 video games, a lot of indie, with sophisticated narratives. Also, please stop with the ad hominem attacks such as, "Also funny how I said exactly what you said only with less pointless words." In comparison to me, you've said relatively nothing, not trying to sound rude.

I could generalize any medium. Most films, comic books, and etc. as cliched and uninspired based off a current contemporary trend, but the good ones are rare and stand out. If I say films suck because year 200X sucked, then I am being ignorant of all the other good films which preceded that year. You're saying games have a "bad footing" because of one vague (and poor) generalization of current trends.

As I said, video games are a serious business.

I hate to say it but I agree that games have shit for narrative right now, even games with good/decent writing are few and far between, most just set up good atmosphere that is rather easy to do in a game. Honestly if games want to be taken seriously they need to start pushing a few products that make you think and get you emotionally invested.

Let's focus on the good games rather than the bad ones. There are many games with sophisticated narratives. It's a young medium, but there are a lot of good stuff out already.

For example, take Deus Ex or Earthbound (read the essay). You don't need convoluted dialogue in order to have a sophisticated narrative. Furthermore, there are some games with convoluted plots such as Xenogears (not saga) and Planescape: Torment. Planescape: Torment's dialogue is pretty good and immersive.

Also, thematic depth could be expressed through simple yet powerful scenes: take Shadow of the Colossus for example; the game leads the player to question Wander's endeavor during each colossi's dramatic downfall. It gives the mammoth colossi a "humanistic look" as they fall to their deaths; it makes the player question his pursuit as being hedonistic or justified. As you can tell, the interactive element adds a whole other element into the experience of the art.

Or, if you want a really mind-bender, look at Killer 7. The game has different layers of interpretations. These include a psychological, political, and even theological interpretation:

Here is a massive plot analysis courtesy of James Clinton Howell:
http://www.gamefaqs.com/console/gamecube/file/562551/38193

I interpreted the game as being a polemic about the East vs West mentality with some psychological elements spread throughout.

I'm not saying there aren't games out there that are trying, what I'm saying is most games are handicapped by the fact that they need to be something a large amount of people want to play. Let us shift over to movies for a second, on my my favorite last year was a small little film called Moon, no real action to it, not all that much investigation, but something about it was just good, it made you think and genuinely care about the person in the movie, now try doing that in a game. My point is none would play a game were you sit around talking to your self for most the game, lets face it, games are stuck in the action genre it can't really branch out from there because it gets boring. Sure a lot of games have great atmosphere(like the team ICO games you mentioned), or great character interactions(like biowear games), but they are all still stuck in action mode and until they can find a way to make any other genre fun then they really can't compare to the the other mediums.

 

[InconceivableTruth]

I'm not saying there aren't games out there that are trying, what I'm saying is most games are handicapped by the fact that they need to be something a large amount of people want to play. Let us shift over to movies for a second, on my my favorite last year was a small little film called Moon, no real action to it, not all that much investigation, but something about it was just good, it made you think and genuinely care about the person in the movie, now try doing that in a game.

My point is none would play a game were you sit around talking to your self for most the game, lets face it, games are stuck in the action genre it can't really branch out from there because it gets boring. Sure a lot of games have great atmosphere(like the team ICO games you mentioned), or great character interactions(like biowear games), but they are all still stuck in action mode and until they can find a way to make any other genre fun then they really can't compare to the the other mediums.[/quote]

Films are interesting because you can have relatively little happen yet a lot said. Death in Venice, 2001: A Space Odyssey, Conan the Barbarian, Gozu, and so many other films with few spoken words. Granted, Team ICO accomplish this well, as I pointed out.

Let's deal with one thing at a time: we're getting into character development ("caring about the person")? I think Shenmue 2 did a good job with minimal action and heavy character development. I started caring about Ryo's quest.

Granted, I understand your point:

In general, there is still stigma attached to video games as being "mere entertainment". People always play a game for the need of a quest or adventure. I think this may change in time as it did with comics.

Game developers need to take the route as indie developers and become bolder. Sure, there are many good games from non-indie developers, as I listed, and they set the standard for the medium, but I see more experimental stuff CURRENTLY coming from Indie developers. As you stated, there is little demand for these, but don't you realize there is a little demand for good contemporary literature also (look at how Stephanie Meiyer is on the top 5 of Amazon all the time)? I think we should look at the medium itself rather than the demand which surrounds it.

There are many games with great narratives and depth, but this may be one apparent weakness in the medium (i.g., how there is always a need for a quest). It is difficult to achieve complete minimalism like the films I listed.

 

[InconceivableTruth]

Dangit, it seems someone already wrote about the Jungian themes in Persona 2:

http://darkmaterials.com/persona/ (click jungian themes --> broken into two parts)

 

[King of the Sandbox]

I agree with OP.

It's as valid as any other medium where people make shit up.

Once I played Mario Bros, and laughed as I stomped a mushroom to death, it was art.

When I saw Aeris/Aerith die in Final Fantasy 7, the story became much more serious and emotionally involving, as it shocked and angered me and made me feel a need for revenge, all for a work of fiction, it was art.

When Red Dead Redemption made me care more about the characters of a video game than I have ever cared about the characters in a book or movie, it was art.

Regardless of what anyone says, if something moves you, emotionally, engages you in thought and philosphy, even magical whimsy, it is an art. Games are more like our imaginations than any other format available, as the interactivity allows us to be there, in the tale.

To say it's not art is as pedantic as people saying "Disco wasn't real music" in the 70's. Just because you don't like or understand something, DOES NOT mean that it doesn't move others on a personal level.

The fact that this conversation has been popping up again and again and again lately should lend more than credence than ever to the fact that there's something there, and more people are being moved by these games, their lives shaped in one form or another by engaging this medium. Tons of people, like myself, are associating these games and their impact on us as some of the most memorable moments of our lives. Does that not deserve the same attention and respect as someone whom was moved by Beethoven? Or Arthur C Clark? Or any other artist who has affected someone with their work?

I'm quoting myself, because no one's answered my question yet, despite the heated debate raging.

I want in, dammit. lol

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

So I don't see a problem with a Video game class if t hey can do a Film class in fact why not throw in Anime and Manga classes too as there is some good stuff there.

Completely off topic, I have to ask why anime and manga would deserve there own classes? Manga is a comic, Anime is animation. I never really got why they became their own genres or even their own medium of art, which some seem to believe. Sure there are good ones out there, but they are still comics and animation

On topic, it's really hard to place videogames at the same line as movies or literature. And it's also hard to place movies and literature on the same line. Each medium has their things. Though videogaming is really young as an art form, there are still pieces of art out there.

And while the mainstream of videogaming is not art, it's not meant to be. Games like Call of Duty should be compared to board games or sport, rather than art. Is Transformers meant to be an art film? Is twilight meant to be art (I'll just leave out the meant part here)? They are light stuff just made to pass your time.

They are their own genre because as an art they are different to Western Comics and cartoons.

Spoiler: Western

Spoiler: Eastern

There are some examples of each and while they are not the best of each they show the contrast between each. Also I probably should of put just comic and cartoons as an art form as I wasn't thinking in a broad sense. As comics and animation are still works of art as they can be compared to books and movies. I think those images show why Manga and Anime are their own genre as you would hardly call a Renaissance painting and a Medieval painting the same would you now? That is why they are seperate.

 

[L4hlborg]

So I don't see a problem with a Video game class if t hey can do a Film class in fact why not throw in Anime and Manga classes too as there is some good stuff there.

Completely off topic, I have to ask why anime and manga would deserve there own classes? Manga is a comic, Anime is animation. I never really got why they became their own genres or even their own medium of art, which some seem to believe. Sure there are good ones out there, but they are still comics and animation

On topic, it's really hard to place videogames at the same line as movies or literature. And it's also hard to place movies and literature on the same line. Each medium has their things. Though videogaming is really young as an art form, there are still pieces of art out there.

And while the mainstream of videogaming is not art, it's not meant to be. Games like Call of Duty should be compared to board games or sport, rather than art. Is Transformers meant to be an art film? Is twilight meant to be art (I'll just leave out the meant part here)? They are light stuff just made to pass your time.

They are their own genre because as an art they are different to Western Comics and cartoons.

Spoiler: Western

Spoiler: Eastern

There are some examples of each and while they are not the best of each they show the contrast between each. Also I probably should of put just comic and cartoons as an art form as I wasn't thinking in a broad sense. As comics and animation are still works of art as they can be compared to books and movies. I think those images show why Manga and Anime are their own genre as you would hardly call a Renaissance painting and a Medieval painting the same would you now? That is why they are seperate.

Actually, a rennaissance painting and a medieval painting are both paintings, even though they vary greatly in style. And movies made from India are still movies, even though they involve people dressing up in colourful costumes and singing about their multiple gods. In the same sense, I believe manga is a form of comics and anime a form of animation.

I'll try to explain a bit here. On top, we have movies. Now movies can be live action or animation. Animation can be scifi, fantasy, kidstuff, etc. There are various styles you can use. You can go kinda realistic, classic western, anime, etc. So in this system, I see anime as a style of animation, not a genre of it. Or it's own category completely seperate from animation.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

So I don't see a problem with a Video game class if t hey can do a Film class in fact why not throw in Anime and Manga classes too as there is some good stuff there.

Completely off topic, I have to ask why anime and manga would deserve there own classes? Manga is a comic, Anime is animation. I never really got why they became their own genres or even their own medium of art, which some seem to believe. Sure there are good ones out there, but they are still comics and animation

On topic, it's really hard to place videogames at the same line as movies or literature. And it's also hard to place movies and literature on the same line. Each medium has their things. Though videogaming is really young as an art form, there are still pieces of art out there.

And while the mainstream of videogaming is not art, it's not meant to be. Games like Call of Duty should be compared to board games or sport, rather than art. Is Transformers meant to be an art film? Is twilight meant to be art (I'll just leave out the meant part here)? They are light stuff just made to pass your time.

They are their own genre because as an art they are different to Western Comics and cartoons.

Spoiler: Western

Spoiler: Eastern

There are some examples of each and while they are not the best of each they show the contrast between each. Also I probably should of put just comic and cartoons as an art form as I wasn't thinking in a broad sense. As comics and animation are still works of art as they can be compared to books and movies. I think those images show why Manga and Anime are their own genre as you would hardly call a Renaissance painting and a Medieval painting the same would you now? That is why they are seperate.

Actually, a rennaissance painting and a medieval painting are both paintings, even though they vary greatly in style. And movies made from India are still movies, even though they involve people dressing up in colourful costumes and singing about their multiple gods. In the same sense, I believe manga is a form of comics and anime a form of animation.

I'll try to explain a bit here. On top, we have movies. Now movies can be live action or animation. Animation can be scifi, fantasy, kidstuff, etc. There are various styles you can use. You can go kinda realistic, classic western, anime, etc. So in this system, I see anime as a style of animation, not a genre of it. Or it's own category completely seperate from animation.

Well I don't see much diffrence from a Anime being a style and a different genre like Sci-Fi and Fantasy have different settings but they also have different styles of being done that sets them apart as well.

 

[Motti]

I remember hearing about a course in videogame at the UTS in Sydney, but whether that was about the overall games themselves or the more computerised aspects to it I'm not exactly certain.

Qantm College in Sydney I'm pretty sure does this, but it is a game design college so it makes sense.

Oh right, I'd forgotten about Quantum

 

[SL33TBL1ND]

I remember hearing about a course in videogame at the UTS in Sydney, but whether that was about the overall games themselves or the more computerised aspects to it I'm not exactly certain.

Qantm College in Sydney I'm pretty sure does this, but it is a game design college so it makes sense.

Oh right, I'd forgotten about Quantum

Mhm, I so want to go there, but from what I can see it is ridiculously expensive.

 

[Harlemura]

Sure, lets take something based around fun and make it boring by writing about it.
This is my view, and I'm pretty sure every gamer I personally know would agree with me.

 

[Kimarous]

Here's my issue with the whole concept. Books, films, and the like are very accessable media; it doesn't take a lot of skill to flip a page or press buttons on a remote. Video games, meanwhile, rely on the player's skill. I can just imagine the following scenario...

Teacher: "All right, class. Let us now discuss the fourth dungeon."

Student: *raises hand* "Um... Miss? I got stuck on the third dungeon's boss and didn't get that far."

 

[Bellvedere]

No.

I love games but they're definitely not on par with great literature or film. They're fun to play and many have interesting stories, etc. What they lack is a focus on language and narrative development.

Maybe they'll one day become great art forms, maybe not. The fact of the matter is you play games. Which means that the parts the player is playing lack anything to analyse. The significance of using a shotgun vs an SMG? How does the control scheme represent youth in today's society? Seriously.

So then why not just compile all the cutscences/story sequences together? Oh right, because then you realise all you're left with is a surprisingly short, boring movie. Otherwise they'd just do that and stop making really bad movie versions.

Also it would completely impractical to have at school. Playing games require some degree of skill greater than what would be required to read a book or watch a movie. If you're playing a genre you hate you can easily get stuck and turn a 10 hour game into a week long nightmare. It would also require everyone to be using the same console/PC or be limited to multiplatform titles. Plus where books and movies are pretty cheap, games are not. You could hire from a video store but imagine your whole class doing that? Would your local video shop have the stock for that?

I imagine it would pretty much encourage piracy, which would just end up hurting the industry. I know film studies students are pretty bad like this. Also any students that require expensive software for their courses (such as engineering students especially) will pirate that too.

 

[InconceivableTruth]

I think the biggest issue with this that people would have is that whole education part. Educating people on video games doesn't seem like it would do any good for someone in the long run, but if it were an elective class to further ones interests, now that would be pretty boss.

It does educate people through its themes and sociological criticisms. All good art does help people in the long run by increasing philosophical inquiries, awareness, imagination, and so forth. I gave examples of specific games with deep narratives that have a lot to say.

No.

I love games but they're definitely not on par with great literature or film. They're fun to play and many have interesting stories, etc. What they lack is a focus on language and narrative development.

You didn't give any reasoning at all. I spent at least one page repeating myself over and over again on how games succeed at narrative development. Deus Ex's narrative flows well and many rpgs succeed at it too.

Maybe they'll one day become great art forms, maybe not. The fact of the matter is you play games. Which means that the parts the player is playing lack anything to analyse. The significance of using a shotgun vs an SMG? How does the control scheme represent youth in today's society? Seriously.

The truth is... you most likely lack an in-depth knowledge of this medium. You have not played artistic games that try to use gameplay as a means for a better narrative. Take Fallout 2, which I explained in the first page. Your actions are not judged by an artificial moral spectrum, but rather, they are judged by each society... which differs depending on place. This is an impressive use of gameplay to show the moral ambiguity in actions.

Or take Earthbound. If you bothered to read the essay, you'd see there are particular examples where gameplay is of crucial important to the narrative.

Granted, gameplay is always important for progressing the plot. It doesn't detract from it, but it could aid in it in innovative ways.

HOWEVER, on a final note, I think we should look at narrative separately from gameplay. Gameplay obviously influences narrative and vice versa, but it is another component of a game and is by no means the main determining factor. As I explained several posts up, it vastly depends on the INTENT of the particular game.

So then why not just compile all the cutscences/story sequences together? Oh right, because then you realise all you're left with is a surprisingly short, boring movie. Otherwise they'd just do that and stop making really bad movie versions.

I could do that for Eternal Darkness, Shenmue, or whatever, but the reason I don't is because I believe a discussion is enough.

Also it would completely impractical to have at school. Playing games require some degree of skill greater than what would be required to read a book or watch a movie. If you're playing a genre you hate you can easily get stuck and turn a 10 hour game into a week long nightmare. It would also require everyone to be using the same console/PC or be limited to multiplatform titles. Plus where books and movies are pretty cheap, games are not. You could hire from a video store but imagine your whole class doing that? Would your local video shop have the stock for that?

There are ways to get past this, such as hand out guides and cheat codes.